America founded by Terrorist

#1

vol_in_ar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
36,291
Likes
1,599
#1
As I was ordering in Starbucks this morning, I walked into a conversation between a customer and a barista..

The Barista said to the customer "well America was founded by terrorists"

I don't know what the converstion was leading up to that comment, but I looked at the Barista, and asked him which one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence did he think was a Terrorist

he said, people needed to stop watching Fox News, and I told him he needed to read a little more American History

then he said, this is still America, and people are entitled to their opinions, I told him he's absolutly right, but that doesn't mean it's the right opinion
 
#3
#3
As I was ordering in Starbucks this morning, I walked into a conversation between a customer and a barista..

The Barista said to the customer "well America was founded by terrorists"

I don't know what the converstion was leading up to that comment, but I looked at the Barista, and asked him which one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence did he think was a Terrorist

he said, people needed to stop watching Fox News, and I told him he needed to read a little more American History

then he said, this is still America, and people are entitled to their opinions, I told him he's absolutly right, but that doesn't mean it's the right opinion

Perhaps the barista was referring to the Founding Fathers treatment of slaves or even women? I admit, though, that he should have done a much better job of explaining himself if he's going to go around making controversial statements like that. While I don't think it's accurate to portray them as terrorists collectively, we do know that they were a morally ambiguous group for certain. I also think we tend to hold them in a higher regard than what we probably should (K-12 history lessons are never critical) - they're not exactly what we would always tend to call completely enlightened men in today's society, although they were relatively enlightened men for their time.

So, just to some up, I agree with you and the barista that we're all entitled to our opinions, but, yes, like you said, people should definitely be able to explain themselves and their statements much better before making them.
 
#4
#4
odds are the barista has a masters in history so you should listen to what he says
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#5
#5
And as far as the TV media are concerned, I've watched a good deal of Fox News and MSNBC. Both make some good points and both often skew things so as to portray them in a favorable/unfavorable (whatever is desirable) light to fit their respective agendas. There's no denying that both those networks have agendas.
 
#6
#6
One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.

However, under what I think is the modern context, the Revolutionaries were rebels, not terrorists.
 
#8
#8
Given the barista's comments on the Founding Fathers as well as his mentioning of Fox News, I would imagine his statement was more a commentary on their political ideals (being terrorist in nature) than on their military strategy, although maybe he was commenting on guerilla warfare. As I said above, I don't think either is a fair criticism of the Founding Fathers; however, they were a morally ambivalent bunch no doubt. Sometimes many Americans take umbrage when someone assaults the image of the Founding Fathers, and we often tend to treat them, as well as the Constitution, as infallible. There's "Well, that's not what the Founding Fathers intended..." this, and "No, the Founding Fathers would never have..." that. This, however, is to do an injustice to history. Even Jefferson himself said that the Constitution ought to be ripped up and thrown in the trash every 19 years or so - the reason being that every generation or two was beholden to a different set of historical conditions than the previous generations that might warrant a "changing of the guard," so to speak. So, in other words, we should take the Constitution, as well as its drafters, seriously but realize, at the same time, that sometimes things just need to evolve to meet constantly changing demands.
 
#10
#10
If politically driven Middle Easterners destroyed commercial American cargo, you would be calling them terrorists. What is the difference between that and the Boston Tea Party?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
Given the barista's comments on the Founding Fathers as well as his mentioning of Fox News, I would imagine his statement was more a commentary on their political ideals (being terrorist in nature) than on their military strategy, although maybe he was commenting on guerilla warfare. As I said above, I don't think either is a fair criticism of the Founding Fathers; however, they were a morally ambivalent bunch no doubt. Sometimes many Americans take umbrage when someone assaults the image of the Founding Fathers, and we often tend to treat them, as well as the Constitution, as infallible. There's "Well, that's not what the Founding Fathers intended..." this, and "No, the Founding Fathers would never have..." that. This, however, is to do an injustice to history. Even Jefferson himself said that the Constitution ought to be ripped up and thrown in the trash every 19 years or so - the reason being that every generation or two was beholden to a different set of historical conditions than the previous generations that might warrant a "changing of the guard," so to speak. So, in other words, we should take the Constitution, as well as its drafters, seriously but realize, at the same time, that sometimes things just need to evolve to meet constantly changing demands.

Most people don't know that about rewriting the constitution to reflect the times. Such talk today is the equivalant of koran burning in Afghanistan to many Americans. Jefferson was so far ahead of his time.
 
#12
#12
Most people don't know that about rewriting the constitution to reflect the times. Such talk today is the equivalant of koran burning in Afghanistan to many Americans. Jefferson was so far ahead of his time.

Yeah, I agree. It is on par with that sort of thing. I like Jefferson a lot; there are many things to admire about him. However, there are still things to dislike as well. The man was not a true egalitarian as much as he may have claimed. Like I said before, though, we must realize that some of their prejudices were shaped by their times. This is not to excuse their actions or beliefs, but, rather, to contextualize them, just as the Constitution must be contextualized (and possibly changed) ever so often.
 
#13
#13
Given the barista's comments on the Founding Fathers as well as his mentioning of Fox News, I would imagine his statement was more a commentary on their political ideals (being terrorist in nature) than on their military strategy, although maybe he was commenting on guerilla warfare. As I said above, I don't think either is a fair criticism of the Founding Fathers; however, they were a morally ambivalent bunch no doubt. Sometimes many Americans take umbrage when someone assaults the image of the Founding Fathers, and we often tend to treat them, as well as the Constitution, as infallible. There's "Well, that's not what the Founding Fathers intended..." this, and "No, the Founding Fathers would never have..." that. This, however, is to do an injustice to history. Even Jefferson himself said that the Constitution ought to be ripped up and thrown in the trash every 19 years or so - the reason being that every generation or two was beholden to a different set of historical conditions than the previous generations that might warrant a "changing of the guard," so to speak. So, in other words, we should take the Constitution, as well as its drafters, seriously but realize, at the same time, that sometimes things just need to evolve to meet constantly changing demands.


Living Constitution?

Yeah, no thanks.
 
#14
#14
If politically driven Middle Easterners destroyed commercial American cargo, you would be calling them terrorists. What is the difference between that and the Boston Tea Party?

the Boston Tea Partiers didn't strap on bombs and detonate themselves in schoolhouses
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
If politically driven Middle Easterners destroyed commercial American cargo, you would be calling them terrorists. What is the difference between that and the Boston Tea Party?

I don't think I would call them terrorists if they were just throwing away cargo.
 
#16
#16
One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.

However, under what I think is the modern context, the Revolutionaries were rebels, not terrorists.

also, none of of our founding fathers went to england and fought the war it was fought on american soil.
 
#17
#17
also, none of of our founding fathers went to england and fought the war it was fought on american soil.

Yeah but to be fair, had they had the means to take the fight to the homeland, I don't think they would have taken such an option off the table.
 
#18
#18
Yeah but to be fair, had they had the means to take the fight to the homeland, I don't think they would have taken such an option off the table.

if they had wanted to take the war to england,don't you think the french would have helped.
 
#20
#20
we would have probably started with english occupied territories first.
 
#23
#23
If politically driven Middle Easterners destroyed commercial American cargo, you would be calling them terrorists. What is the difference between that and the Boston Tea Party?

the founding fathers didn't attack, England and continue to try and destroy thier way of life
 
#25
#25
sad thing is that's the only Starbucks around here
So I'll definetly see him again
 

VN Store



Back
Top